Adjustment to the Alliance Cap Test on February 26th

    • scions wrote:

      Gerrit wrote:

      scions wrote:

      Are you doing something against Disaray abuse ? Because BA use it very efficient, atm moment Disaray punish only guy that play fair, so dev maybe do something , no ?
      Define fair play.
      when you don't kick some guild of your alliance for don't have any disaray. When you don't abuse game mechnaic for killing the fun
      Big alliances r braking up as u all wated, what r u complaining now about? that former alliated guilds r still working together to keep the same territories they have conquered? really, r u surprised about that?

      Some of us said a lot of times that thats exactly what was going to happen but everyone was shouting out "hurra! no more alliances! we will finally be able to have our own hide out and cluster in the BZ!"

      It is not unfair since every alliance can do the same. Thats the definition of fairness.
    • Guilefulwolf wrote:

      scions wrote:

      Gerrit wrote:

      scions wrote:

      Are you doing something against Disaray abuse ? Because BA use it very efficient, atm moment Disaray punish only guy that play fair, so dev maybe do something , no ?
      Define fair play.
      when you don't kick some guild of your alliance for don't have any disaray. When you don't abuse game mechnaic for killing the fun
      Big alliances r braking up as u all wated, what r u complaining now about? that former alliated guilds r still working together to keep the same territories they have conquered? really, r u surprised about that?
      Some of us said a lot of times that thats exactly what was going to happen but everyone was shouting out "hurra! no more alliances! we will finally be able to have our own hide out and cluster in the BZ!"

      It is not unfair since every alliance can do the same. Thats the definition of fairness.
      You slowly kill the game, i don't know how you can think like that u abuse of the game mechanic. You fight at 3/1, i don't even know how you can be happy it's fun for no one even for u. If that continue in 2-3 month the game is dead . And stop with we are all friends we don't kill our old friends ... you was 15 in squak, that a non sense if you want we can all be in a same alliances and non one play.
    • @scions Go and read my last posts and find out what is my oponion about this issue. I am for somehow limitting the hyper expansion power of a single guild/alliance. Im just pointing that the measures devs have taken will make near to zero effect and that some of us knew this was going to happen, people complaining of guilds working together under the upcoming mechanics. It is not unfair as long as players dont use any kind of cheat or abuse of any bug, it is just how it is and if devs want it to change then they must try other measures.
    • SunnyT wrote:

      I don't think that you get it! the issue is not in how many territories the alliances hold! It's about them roaming around in 200 man zergs vs 30-40 players. Chase the small zerg across 5 maps, and then camp the hideouts to keep you there! This is NOT content, this is just suicide, and donate gear to the "MEGAS". We go out looking for some good ZVZ and come across a beast of T4/T5 blob, where we get wiped out in seconds. Because the zerg debuff does jack all when they hit you in waves, whilst your cooldowns are still down.
      There is a reason why 80% of people voted for the alliances to go away. Because there would finally be some content in this game.
      Your excuse for "casual players, friends and traders, wont be able to play with their friends" is not good enough.
      Having 300 people in either an alliance or just the guild is plenty!! These "MEGAS" just want to have 3-4 alts in the guild so that they can have multiple battlemounts.
      Open your eyes and see what is happening in front of you. Don't just stream Reset days, stream daily ZVZ's and you will see how unfair and absolutely trash it is to go out fighting.
      I have grown to really love this game, but with these beastly zergs roaming around, i may have to stop my premium, and stop playing all together.

      Rant over.
      With the current system you have an option. You can form up a big alliance from smaller guilds that will work together to establish themselves. Or you can go and be part of a bigger alliance, and have your own casual semi-competitve guild enjoy some great ZvZ content and access to resources.

      With a 300 alliance cap, you won't have an option. You will continue dieing to ULTRA MEGA guilds that will CTA 150 extremely hardcore players that will wipe you out in a matter of minutes. There will be numerous of these alliances, controlling all t7 and t8 resources, no casual guild or player will EVER set his foot on a t7 or t8 zone. These ULTRA MEGA one guild alliances won't sell ANY of their t7 or t8 resources, so now not only are they far superior than you in terms of combat, but they outgear the HELL out of you. And guess what, these alliances will work together to control EVERYTHING. They won't attack each other, they will just prey on the weak.
      Also, 300 man capped alliance means that EVERYONE is an enemy of yourself. Do you honestly think after all that, that a hideout of a casual 20-30 players guild will ever make it out there?
      It's understandable that there is frustation being pushed over, but do also understand that a change like that could literally destroy this game for everyone.
    • TheGreek wrote:

      SunnyT wrote:

      I don't think that you get it! the issue is not in how many territories the alliances hold! It's about them roaming around in 200 man zergs vs 30-40 players. Chase the small zerg across 5 maps, and then camp the hideouts to keep you there! This is NOT content, this is just suicide, and donate gear to the "MEGAS". We go out looking for some good ZVZ and come across a beast of T4/T5 blob, where we get wiped out in seconds. Because the zerg debuff does jack all when they hit you in waves, whilst your cooldowns are still down.
      There is a reason why 80% of people voted for the alliances to go away. Because there would finally be some content in this game.
      Your excuse for "casual players, friends and traders, wont be able to play with their friends" is not good enough.
      Having 300 people in either an alliance or just the guild is plenty!! These "MEGAS" just want to have 3-4 alts in the guild so that they can have multiple battlemounts.
      Open your eyes and see what is happening in front of you. Don't just stream Reset days, stream daily ZVZ's and you will see how unfair and absolutely trash it is to go out fighting.
      I have grown to really love this game, but with these beastly zergs roaming around, i may have to stop my premium, and stop playing all together.

      Rant over.
      With the current system you have an option. You can form up a big alliance from smaller guilds that will work together to establish themselves. Or you can go and be part of a bigger alliance, and have your own casual semi-competitve guild enjoy some great ZvZ content and access to resources.
      With a 300 alliance cap, you won't have an option. You will continue dieing to ULTRA MEGA guilds that will CTA 150 extremely hardcore players that will wipe you out in a matter of minutes. There will be numerous of these alliances, controlling all t7 and t8 resources, no casual guild or player will EVER set his foot on a t7 or t8 zone. These ULTRA MEGA one guild alliances won't sell ANY of their t7 or t8 resources, so now not only are they far superior than you in terms of combat, but they outgear the HELL out of you. And guess what, these alliances will work together to control EVERYTHING. They won't attack each other, they will just prey on the weak.
      Also, 300 man capped alliance means that EVERYONE is an enemy of yourself. Do you honestly think after all that, that a hideout of a casual 20-30 players guild will ever make it out there?
      It's understandable that there is frustation being pushed over, but do also understand that a change like that could literally destroy this game for everyone.

      This, this, this, and again, this! :)
    • TheGreek wrote:

      With the current system you have an option. You can form up a big alliance from smaller guilds that will work together to establish themselves. Or you can go and be part of a bigger alliance, and have your own casual semi-competitve guild enjoy some great ZvZ content and access to resources.
      With a 300 alliance cap, you won't have an option. You will continue dieing to ULTRA MEGA guilds that will CTA 150 extremely hardcore players that will wipe you out in a matter of minutes. There will be numerous of these alliances, controlling all t7 and t8 resources, no casual guild or player will EVER set his foot on a t7 or t8 zone. These ULTRA MEGA one guild alliances won't sell ANY of their t7 or t8 resources, so now not only are they far superior than you in terms of combat, but they outgear the HELL out of you. And guess what, these alliances will work together to control EVERYTHING. They won't attack each other, they will just prey on the weak.
      Also, 300 man capped alliance means that EVERYONE is an enemy of yourself. Do you honestly think after all that, that a hideout of a casual 20-30 players guild will ever make it out there?
      It's understandable that there is frustation being pushed over, but do also understand that a change like that could literally destroy this game for everyone.
      Yeah but that 150 CTA cant be online all the time and some of their members might get ganked by NAPs and it creates drama and perhaps theyll start fighting eachother instead of dividing the map and just holding hands.

      Soooooo, what you're saying its gonna be just as it is right now EXCEPT theyll kill each other sometimes? Sounds like an absolute win. They're already praying on the weak and outgearing the hell out of us and have more mounts. Theyre already controlling everything, sooo a 300 man capped alliane means theres gonna be 10 alliances instead of 1 and i see this as an absolute win.

      It wont destroy the game for anyone, just doomsday sayers that exploit the current system keep crying.
    • TheGreek wrote:

      With the current system you have an option. You can form up a big alliance from smaller guilds that will work together to establish themselves. Or you can go and be part of a bigger alliance, and have your own casual semi-competitve guild enjoy some great ZvZ content and access to resources.
      With a 300 alliance cap, you won't have an option. You will continue dieing to ULTRA MEGA guilds that will CTA 150 extremely hardcore players that will wipe you out in a matter of minutes. There will be numerous of these alliances, controlling all t7 and t8 resources, no casual guild or player will EVER set his foot on a t7 or t8 zone. These ULTRA MEGA one guild alliances won't sell ANY of their t7 or t8 resources, so now not only are they far superior than you in terms of combat, but they outgear the HELL out of you. And guess what, these alliances will work together to control EVERYTHING. They won't attack each other, they will just prey on the weak.
      Also, 300 man capped alliance means that EVERYONE is an enemy of yourself. Do you honestly think after all that, that a hideout of a casual 20-30 players guild will ever make it out there?
      It's understandable that there is frustation being pushed over, but do also understand that a change like that could literally destroy this game for everyone.
      You're severely over-estimating the capabilities of mega-alliances.

      Most of the time, they are distracted and focused upon each other.

      They tend to ignore the small groups/guilds/alliances, until those small numbers become a substantial threat.


      Small alliances probably cannot win territories on Tier 7 maps, but might have a chance on Tier 5.
    • Damn, this is really disappointing. I was planning to come back because today is the 26th and I thought the Alliance changes were happening. Unfortunately, it looks like SBI is still listening to a tiny fraction of their playerbase so they decided to cancel them after that tiny percentage complained. It was so disappointing coming here only to see this topic. Territories are not the primary or only issue. Limiting alliances to 300 people was the first healthy suggestion I had heard regarding this issue - but then to cancel it under the guise of protecting the friends that might get purged? What? Why does this tiny fraction of a playerbase control the devs? Their the dev for christ's sake. The whole relationship is backwards. Oh well, I guess I'm out again. Eventually I am going to stop checking back for positive changes. I assume I am not alone. People have been asking for this one change for years.

      The post was edited 3 times, last by ggmp ().

    • @Eltharyon

      + Guild limit: 300 players
      + Alliance limit: none

      Listen to the players, right?

      FAKE!


      You just listen to a few idiots of big alliances around your stupid round table.
      Martlock's BZ, for example, is unplayable because the ARCHOLES don't know how to fight with honor:
      We were 9 in a dj, they brought back 50 people from 9 differents guilds to kill us ... And they scoot 4 times before engage ...

      You don't listen to the right people.
      It's a shame, you lose all credibility.
    • I have an important request, based on current situation. I know having 'publicly open hideout' would be nice, but due to possibility of 'item loss' this remains a dream.

      WHILE

      Former mega alliances are abusing mechanics and establish NAPs by allowing other 'enemy' guilds to enter their hideouts. This creates HUGE inequality against REAL SOLO guilds. Mega alliances are too safe to transfer and travel in the outlands, abusing territory ownership / disarray limitations.

      I would love to see Tesco-style hideouts opened for everyone, but due to territory ownership-domination this is not going to happen, so the only solution is to limit hideouts to alliance only and solving above problem.


      @Korn @Mytherceria please consider and further diminish possibility of creating unofficial NAPs making game fair for those who don't want to be part of this scheme.


      Thanks in advance,
    • 7 of the top 10 guilds in the current season ranking are no longer in an alliance ... so the changes are working as intended, WITHOUT the need for a hard cap. And thats on day 1 of the changes. The large alliances are starting to shrink. Its heading in the right direction for sure.
      Midgard
      T8 Fibre, Ore, Hide, Wood & Stone Gatherer
      T8 Gathering Gear Crafter
      T8 Bags & Capes Crafter

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Midgard ().

    • Midgard wrote:

      7 of the top 10 guilds in the current season ranking are no longer in an alliance ... so the changes are working as intended, WITHOUT the need for a hard cap. And thats on day 1 of the changes. The large alliances are starting to shrink. Its heading in the right direction for sure.
      Still all PoE and all SQUAD guilds have access to other guilds hideouts and staying in NAP in the open world. While it's already better than before, there's still area for further improvements.
    • glokz wrote:

      I have an important request, based on current situation. I know having 'publicly open hideout' would be nice, but due to possibility of 'item loss' this remains a dream.

      WHILE

      Former mega alliances are abusing mechanics and establish NAPs by allowing other 'enemy' guilds to enter their hideouts. This creates HUGE inequality against REAL SOLO guilds. Mega alliances are too safe to transfer and travel in the outlands, abusing territory ownership / disarray limitations.

      I would love to see Tesco-style hideouts opened for everyone, but due to territory ownership-domination this is not going to happen, so the only solution is to limit hideouts to alliance only and solving above problem.


      @Korn @Mytherceria please consider and further diminish possibility of creating unofficial NAPs making game fair for those who don't want to be part of this scheme.


      Thanks in advance,

      Hi @glokz, we are aware of the NAPs situation and will look into how it runs in the test, and possibly look into making adjustments if it continues to be in a bad situation.

      Mytherceria#3744